An entire discussion of taxation policy without any discussion of how the money is spent just comes across as punitive: we should tax capital more because rich people are bad. It’s not very insightful.
If you would like to be taxed more, the IRS accepts donations.
Hmm. Sounds like I didn't communicate very clearly. This entire article is about how the money is spent... on cash welfare for capital-holders! I would prefer that these subsidies instead go to building nuclear reactors, or maybe paying down the deficit.
Re: "rich people are bad", please refer to footnote #5.
Welp, a few people have pointed out to me that I completely missed Harris walking her proposed cap gains rates down to 28% (33% after a 5% investment tax) a few days ago: https://www.wsj.com/politics/elections/kamala-harris-to-pare-back-bidens-capital-gains-tax-proposal-14c537b1?st=lvmcubofm4dbqpf&reflink=article_copyURL_share. That would change the math here somewhat (though not entirely). We'll see what happens. Thanks to everyone who let me know... this is what I get for spending a few days heads down copy-editing.
An entire discussion of taxation policy without any discussion of how the money is spent just comes across as punitive: we should tax capital more because rich people are bad. It’s not very insightful.
If you would like to be taxed more, the IRS accepts donations.
Hmm. Sounds like I didn't communicate very clearly. This entire article is about how the money is spent... on cash welfare for capital-holders! I would prefer that these subsidies instead go to building nuclear reactors, or maybe paying down the deficit.
Re: "rich people are bad", please refer to footnote #5.